wtf is going on? Bizzarre
I understand your position.
The matter we are discussing is very specific in nature and what I think of a hypothetical scenario is irrelevant.
Are you sure?
Anything I have read about this does not suggest the meeting decided to place the land on the market or that it can do so but that it reccomended proceeding to a decision to place the land on the market.
My understanding is that the area meeting did not decide to put the land on the market as you claim but reccomended a decision to put the land on the market. I dont believe an area committee has the power to decide to put land on the market.
Your own opinion could be as easily dismissed. We might have a more interesting discussion if you are to give an example of what it is you think I am ignorant of?
I notice you've gone very quiet as to why RTE are reporting "it was agreed by the Bruff electoral area committee to place the site "on the open market"" despite that being a direct contradiction of your emphatic claim "that the meeting on January 15th 2007 did not have the power to offer the lands for sale on the open market."
Are RTE ignorant as well?
would you agree with the general statement that a person who is planning a development project and is actively trying to purchase land for it is involved in a project that relates to dealing in or developing land?
i see we're playing "word rollercoaster" again trying to equate something to which it isnt.
so much ignorance of legal terms, definitions, council executives and protocoals here... but hey, round and round we go....
There is no doubt opinions here vary on the issue, hence why I said it has not been established.
Irrespective of the specific individual or the specific land involved in this instance, would you agree with the general statement that a person who is planning a development project and is actively trying to purchase land for it is involved in a project that relates to dealing in or developing land?
I have been following the thread and posted a few times.
I found the case quite strong for the "no interest" side.
However if you have further information on the matter I will be happy to take it into consideration.
Indeed, she very much didn't. So that clause is completely irrelevant.
Yes, there are plenty here who would like to shut the door on that question and declare it incontrovertible. But it has far from been established.
I thought we had already established that she didn't have an interest which required disclosure to be made under subsection 1.
Not quite, he couldn't just skip the meeting and say nothing. Once he knew of his wife's interest he was required to make a disclosure even if he was unable to attend the meeting for other reasons.
(2) Where a member of a local authority, committee, joint committee or joint body of the local authority has actual knowledge that a matter is likely to arise at a meeting at which that member will not be present and which, if he or she were present, a disclosure would be required to be made under subsection (1) , then that person shall in advance of such meeting make such disclosure in writing and furnish it to the ethics registrar
Just an observation on the recusing business.
Isn't the bar very small between hero and zero in these type of cases ?
If NC had gone out for a smoke or sent apologies altogether and skipped the meeting he would be in the clear.
The proposal would still have gone through on the nod.
Whatever advantage his wife stood to gain from the process she would still have.
It's a glaring conflict of interest. He's either too stupid to realise that or he's a crook who didn't care.
We should not want either type of person in Government.
It's great and amusing to see FG voters vigorously defending a FF politician for antics in the Bertie era. Civil war politics is truly over! We all know what the public perception is and this guy is toast at the next election.
The property was put on the market in January 2007 Collins was a cllr in January 2007.
"PERSONAL MATTERS"
Yes it has been reported on. For example, RTE:
On 15 December 2006, Limerick solicitor Patricia O'Connor wrote to Limerick County Council's Department of Housing to express an interest in a specific site on Main Street in Patrickswell.
Ms O'Connor said she was writing on behalf of "a client", whose name has been redacted in FOI documents.
She said her client "wishes to provide a centre in Patrickswell to provide a service" - the details of which have also been redacted - and asked the council to explain how the land could be purchased as at that time it was in public ownership.
Council agrees to put the site on the market
A few weeks later, on 15 January 2007, the issue was raised at Limerick County Council's Bruff electoral area committee meeting.
The meeting minutes of that meeting show councillors were told there had been "a number of enquiries to purchase a parcel of land at Main Street in Patrickswell".
And they were also told the site was three quarters of an acre and had "very limited use as an open space".
As such, it was agreed by the Bruff electoral area committee to place the site "on the open market" and that officials would update "the meeting again for further consideration".
That 15 January 2007 meeting was attended by seven councillors, including Mr Collins.
Mr Collins did not table the motion or second it.
The meeting minutes are unclear if a formal vote took place, but no objections were raised to the decision.
What happened to the property in 2007
Files released today by Limerick County Council show the Patrickswell site was advertised for sale twice in the Limerick Leader in January and February 2007.
So RTE are reporting that "it was agreed by the Bruff electoral area committee to place the site "on the open market""
Have they got their facts wrong? If so please enlighten us as to why RTE are reported the property was advertised for sale in January 2007 yet you are saying he wasn't even a councillor when the property was marketed?
Christ, no it wasn’t. The County Council had to decide on whether property was to be sold, not the local committee meeting which Collins attended. He wasn’t even a councillor when the property was marketed and sold.
This stuff has been reported on, following a FOI request. So either the Ditch didn’t bother getting the facts before reporting, or did make a FOI request and didn’t bother reporting on its contents.
The meeting was on 15th January 2007.
We know that the land was not offered for sale on the open market before that meeting, otherwise Collins' wife would have simply placed a bid with the appointed auctioneer rather than writing to the council expressing an interest in purchasing it.
And we know that land was offered for sale on the open market after that meeting, because an auctioneer was appointed and the property was advertised for sale in the Limerick Leader in January 2007 and February 2007. Subsequent to which, Collins' wife duly did place a bid with the appointed auctioneer.
So if it was not decided to put the land on the market by the councillors at that meeting, when and who did decide to put the land on the market?
Everyone agrees that he should have disclosed it, that is not the same as saying he had a pecuniary interest in the property, or that he was legally required to/broke the law by not saying his wife was one of many people who expressed an interest in buying it.
It would make it more likely he would have broken the code of conduct.
It still would not have been illegal.
Ok, he did no wrong because the councillors did not decide to offer the land for sale at that particular meeting.
Are we in agreement that if decision to offer the land for sale at that meeting had been taken it would have been wrongdoing?
Posting nonsense at 1 a.m. smacks of desperation.
There is nothing to that, as many other posters have pointed out. We are down to bare wood at the bottom of the barrel.
At that meeting the councillors decided to offer the land for sale on the open market.
This bit.
The meeting that Collins attended did not decide to offer the land for sale on the open market. The meeting that Collins attended had no power to offer any land for sale, all they could do was recommend to the council that the land be considered for sale.
By the time the council considered selling the land and ultimately voted on it Collins was no longer a councillor, and took no part in the process.
at that meeting the councillors decided to offer the land for sale on the open market.
that statement is incorrect
the meeting on January 15th 2007 did not have the power to offer the lands for sale on the open market.
That's where you're wrong. The local area committee did not have the power to offer any land for sale.
Wrong, it wasn't decided at that meeting to offer the land for sale on the open market. That meeting did not have the power to do that.
OK, what is incorrect about it?
thats incorrect
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/a46418388544fe9f8f6352b57fb2f921.svg)
